22: 77 from the button on the bubble

[junkmail3]

Yeah, check out this thread, it's all here:
Shadow's STT Thread

When you discount blinds 50% and use the default average range (66+,ATs+,AJo+) for the SB and the default loose range (44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+) for the BB, this is a break even push. So, I don't think it's a clear push.

Switch the stacks between UTG and the BB and the push (using the same discounting and ranges) is now +1.1%

[tigerite]

I still am not convinced about the discounting blinds stuff, so I didn't use it.

[IdiotVig]

[ QUOTE ]
When you discount blinds 50% and use the default average range (66+,ATs+,AJo+) for the SB and the default loose range (44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+) for the BB, this is a break even push. So, I don't think it's a clear push.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is discounting 50% a reasonable amount, though, given the stack sizes in play?

Well, if this hand is folded around, next hand the BB will have 1400 and the SB will have 3590. I think this makes it highly likely the BB will be contested next hand.

[tigerite]

You do realise that 50% actually just takes off 50% of the big blind from his stack, and assumes those are the stacks at the end of this hand (if everyone folds to the BB).. and it doesn't do that for EV/no call. That's why I don't overly trust it, I mean the thing about taking off 100 from UTG's stack is alright I suppose, and then assuming we have 7900 chips in play, but it's the EV no call bit that bothers me intently, it assumes he still has 1400.

At least, unless eastbay has since fixed it.

I assumed that discounting for the BB meant that some portion of UTG's stack is removed when figuring post-hand equity.

I was not aware that the discounting only took place for the all-fold result. That would seem to be a flaw.